Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497646 --- Comment #18 from Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]> 2009-05-13 04:19:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) > 1. What are you saying? I consider a support package that is not removed when > the main package is removed a packaging mishap. %{fontname}-common should not > exist in the system if there is no %{fontname}-fonts package installed. This is not a realistic expectation. Large parts of the distro violate this rule today and have for a long as Fedora and RHL existed. > 2. What "undocumented yum behaviour" might you be referring to? The thing that > a package automatically provides itself with its own version, and yum updates > packages with newer versions? You make different packages, that can be installed simultaneously, have the same provides. This has always been a case the dependency engines didn't handle very well. And you don't even have a strong reason to do so, your fix is at best cosmetic. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
